sak ede ine 





2 Sa ee eRe TATA 











THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


FRANK GRENVILLE BearpDsLey., Pu.D., S.T.D. 


a 


f, A 
a TP RLY Ke 
% ‘ 








2 MA 
“, 





THE oun sens 
MIRACLES OF JESUS 
BY 


FRANK GRENVILLE ‘BEARDSLEY., Pu.D., S.T.D. 
Author of “A History of American Revivals” 


AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY 
7 West 45th Street 
New York 


COPYRIGHT, 1926 
BY THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


Printed in the United States of America 


TO THE MEMBERS OF 
FOUNTAIN PARK CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH 
ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 





FOREWORD 


One of the vital issues now before the religious 
world is the validity of the miracles of Jesus. 
Even within circles esteemed orthodox a tend- 
ency has developed to ignore or reject the 
supernatural. Much has been said and written 
against the miracles of Jesus. This little book 
has been written in the strong conviction that 
there are some things which ought to be said 
in defence of the miracles. 


In the last analysis the arguments herein 
adduced rest upon a belief in the integrity, 
authenticity, and veracity of the Sacred Scrip- 
tures. Upon the basis of competent Christian 
scholarship it has been taken for granted that 
the New Testament writings are trustworthy 
records. 


To those whose minds are closed upon this 
subject there probably is little that can be said, 
but to those who seriously seek the truth it is 
hoped that the lines of reasoning which have 
been followed may prove both helpful and con- 
vincing. 

Frank G. BEARDSLEY. 





Contents 


PAGE 
CHAPTER I, 

The Miracles of Jesus...cccccccscccsscsssssussssssssssesun 13 
Cuapter II. 

The Miracles of Jesus, (continued)............ 27 
Cuapter III. 

SPE RTICATTIATION) oo fica iat ba ee ce pw oat 49 
CHAPTER IV. 

TRA APGtE COILED este co 77 


CHAPTER V. 


The Resurrection Of Jesus cieccccccccccccscscssssssssesscnen 99 





THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 





THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


CHAPTER I. 





THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


We are living in an age when there is a tend- 
ency both within and without theological circles 
to discredit the miracles and cast a doubt upon 
the supernatural. In his work on “Religion and 
Miracle” Dr. George A. Gordon says: “The 
reality of miracle has been under suspicion 
among educated minds in all ages. . . . Hitherto 
_ the suspicion of the reality of miracle has 
come from thinkers outside the pale of organ- 
ized Christianity. . . . The significance of the 
new question concerning miracle is that it 
comes from profoundly religious men, and from | 
men living and potent within the Christian 
Church. . . . Scientific men, in so far as they 
are under the scientific spirit, see no miracle, 
that is they note no violations of the order 


13 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


of cause and effect; they expect to meet with 
no violations of this order; they believe in 
none. For them the miracles of all religions 
are the interesting products of human imagina- 
tion; they are a chapter in the serious fiction of 
the world. May a member of the Christian 
Church, may a preacher of the gospel, in any 
degree sympathize with the attitude of scientific 
men toward miracle, and yet remain loyal to his 
Master? ‘These are questions working to-day in 
the religious mind wherever that mind has ob- 
tained a modern education.”’ 


Whatever may be our attitude towards Dr. 
Gordon’s viewpoint, it is evident from the trend 
of present-day thinking that we must reconsider 
the miracles, especially the miracles of Jesus, 
if on no other ground than to be able to give a 
reason for the faith that is in us. 


To brush aside the miracles and say that 
they never were performed is a very summary 
and seems like a very easy method of ridding 
ourselves of any difficulties that the miracles 
may involve. But the denial of the miracles 
will not rid us of these difficulties. We find 
that the miracles are recorded by all four 


14 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


writers of the Gospels. If there were no mira- 
cles what explanation can we offer for the 
presence of the miracles in the Gospel narra- 
tives? If we are to deny the miraculous in the 
life of Jesus must we not for the same reason 
deny everything that is unique in his life and 
character? If we accept a part of the record 
why should we not accept the whole, and if we 
deny a part of the record why should we not 
on equal grounds deny the whole? So in the 
last analysis the denial of the miracles of Jesus 
brings us back to the more vital and funda- 
mental question, viz: that of Jesus Himself. We 
must not, we dare not ignore, the question of the 
miracles. The only way in which we may deal 
with this question is candidly and squarely to 
face the miracles of Jesus. 


Three principal objections to miracles have 
been raised: First, they are not possible; sec- 
ond, they are not credible; and third, they are 
not probable. These objections and the argu- 
ments upon which they are founded will be con- 
sidered in their order. 


I. It is argued that miracles are impos- 
sible. This is the objection of Hume, who says: 


15 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


“A miracle is contrary to a law of nature: 
therefore an over-weighting amount of evidence 
is required to prove it.” The objection of 
Hume has lost much of its cogency and force 
with the changed attitude towards God and 
nature. We no longer look upon God as a 
deus ex machina and the universe as a great 
mechanism which the Almighty has started go- 
ing like a gigantic clock which runs itself and 
with which He never interferes except when 
something goes wrong. The modern idea is that 
God is immanent in nature, everywhere present 
by His Spirit; and that the laws or processes 
of nature are but the manifestations or expres- 
sions of His ceaseless activity. 


What have been termed the laws of nature 
are simply the fixed and uniform processes of 
nature. Any deviations from them such as mira- 
cles, instead of being violations of the laws of 
nature and therefore contrary to nature, may 
be but the manifestations of the higher laws of 
nature. For example we know that it is a law 
of nature that heat expands and cold contracts. 
According to that law ice ought to sink in 
water, but we know that ice does not sink. Is 


16 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


that contrary to the laws of nature? By no 
means ; it is simply the manifestation of a higher 
law of nature, viz: the law of crystallization, 
by which the specific gravity of the frozen parti- 
cles of water is lessened and they become lighter 
than the particles of water in the fluid state, 
so that instead of sinking they rise to the sur- 
face of the water. 


Man is constantly deviating from the so-called 
laws of nature. In fact as Lord Kelvin has said, 
“Every action of the human free-will is a mira- 
cle to physical and chemical and mathematical 
science.” It is contrary to the laws of nature 
for iron to float or for bodies heavier than air 
to rise above the surface of the earth, and yet 
gigantic battle-ships ride majestically upon 
the bosom of the deep, while aeroplanes bird- 
like gracefully soar thousands of feet above the 
clouds. This is done through no violation of the 
laws of nature but by the manifestation of other 
and higher laws of nature. The same principle 
holds true of the X-ray, the wireless telegraph 
and telephone, and a thousand other wonders 
which have been wrought by man’s inventive 
genius. From the standpoint of the fixed and 


17 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


uniform processes of nature these are miracles 
no less truly than the feeding of the five thou- 
sand, the stilling of the tempest, and the rais- 
ing of Lazarus from the dead. 


Is man greater than God? If it is possible 
for man thus to perform miracles is it impossible 
for God or the Son of God? If God is imma- 
nent in nature, if the processes of nature are 
but the manifestations or expressions of the 
ceaseless activity of God, there can be no a 
priors assumptions against miracles, which are 
not contrary to the laws of nature, but are 
wrought in conformity with the higher laws of 
nature or the laws of God. 


II. While the possibility of miracles is now 
pretty generally conceded, they are objected to 
in the second place on the ground that they are 
not credible. This is the objection of Huxley 
who says: “If a man tells me he saw a piebald 
horse in Piccadilly I believe him without hesi- 
tation. The thing itself is likely enough, and 
there is no imaginable motive for his deceiving 
me. But if the same person tells me he observed 
a zebra there, I might hesitate a little about 
accepting his testimony, unless I were well sat- 


18 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


isfied, not only as to his previous acquaintance 
with zebras, but as to his powers and oppor- 
tunities of observation in the present case. If, 
however, my informant assured me that he be- 
held a centaur trotting down that famous 
thoroughfare, I should emphatically decline to 
credit his statement; and this even if he were 
the most saintly of men and ready to suffer 
martyrdom in support of his belief.” 


Huxley’s objection is not well founded for the 
reason that the wonder to which he alludes 
would be isolated and unrelated. Isolated and 
unrelated miracles are always to be received 
with suspicion. But the miracles of Jesus are 
not isolated and unrelated. Instead they are 
related to a great historic character and a 
great historic movement. In his “Thoughts on 
Religion,” George J. Romanes, the eminent 
scientist, said: “The antecedent improbability 
against a miracle being wrought by a man with- 
out a moral object is apt to be confused with 
that of its being done by God with an adequate 
moral object. The former is immeasurably 
great; the latter is only equal to that of the 
theory of theism, i. e., nil.” It is this precisely 


19 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


that Huxley leaves out of consideration in his 
hypothetical miracle of the centaur. 


Jesus Christ is the only adequate explana- 
tion for the fact of Christianity, and if we. 
deny the miraculous in his life we introduce not 
only an irrational but an inexplicable element 
into Christianity itself. As Sanday says: “The 
truth is that the historian who tries to con- 
struct a reasoned picture of the life of Christ 
finds that he cannot dispense with the miracles. 
He is confronted with the fact that no sooner 
had the life of Jesus ended in apparent failure 
and shame than the great body of Christians— 
not an individual here and there, but the great 
mass of the Church—passed over at once to 
the fixed belief that he was God. . . There must 
have been something about the Life, a broad 
and substantial element in it, which they could” 
recognize as supernatural and divine—not that 
we can recognize, but which they could recog- 
nize with the ideas of the time. Eliminate mira- 
cles from the career of Jesus, and the belief of 
Christians, from the first moment that we have 
undoubted contemporary evidence of it (say 
A. D. 50), becomes an insoluble enigma.” 


20 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


III. The latest argument against miracles is 
that they are not probable. This is the ob- 
jection of Dr. George A. Gordon in the book 
already alluded to, “Religion and Miracle.” In 
his preface he explicitly states: “I have no in- 
terest in the destruction of the belief in miracle. 
I am concerned to show that where miracle has 
ceased to be regarded as true, Christianity re- 
mains in its essence entire; that the fortune of 
religion is not to be identified with the fortune 
of miracle; that the message of Jesus Christ to 
the world is independent of miracle, lives by its 
own reality and worth, self-evidencing and self- 
attesting.” 


Yet later on in his thesis he waives the whole 
question of miracle when he says: ‘That I may 
see for myself, that I may help others to see, 
that religion is independent of miracle, I ac- 
cept in a provisional way the denial of miracle 
as the basis of debate. Miracle is myth; so it 
is said by a multitude of scholars and thinkers; 
and we allow the contention to stand. These 
thinkers assert that natural law rules over all; 
and we accept the assertion as true.” Through- 
out the book he assumes that miracle is con- 


21 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


trary to law; but as this objection has been 
considered already in answering the argument 
of Hume we now pass it over. He bases his 
objection to the probability of miracles on the 
ground that they are unverifiable. In this con- 
nection he says: 


“History has two sides, one factual, the other 
ideal. ' In regard to these two sides of history 
we ask two distinct and different questions. 
In regard to the facts we ask: Did they 
occur? In regard to the ideas we ask: Are 
they true? The alleged facts of history are of 
two kinds—natural and miraculous. Even 
where the alleged facts are natural, scholars 
are often unable to arrive at an affirmative con- 
clusion respecting them. . . . When the alleged 
facts are miraculous, the question: Did they 
occur? is a much harder one. Other questions 
come in, such as: For what end did they take 
place? By whom are they attested? Is the 
attestation that of an eye-witness or tradition? 
How far were the witnesses and reporters in- 
fluenced by the general belief in the miraculous? 
How does this exceptional and limited human 
experience stand against the solemn general ex- 


22 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


perience of mankind? Such questions set be- 
fore one the impossibility of attaining anything 
like certainty in regard to miracle at its best, 
—miracle in the evangelical record. It must 
therefore be placed in the category of the un- 
verifiable. It is not on that account necessarily 
untrue, but its truth is not open to attestation.” 


With the ideas of Jesus, he contends that it 
is otherwise since they are verifiable in human 
experience. This is of course true, and it is 
also true that the things which we know by 
actual experience rest upon a more solid foun- 
dation than the knowledge which comes to us in 
other ways. But are we justified on that ac- 
count in rejecting all knowledge which cannot 
be verified in our own experiences? Such a pro- 
cedure would reduce all history to myth and 
fiction, for how could we verify in our own ex- 
periences the conquests of Alexander the Great, 
the victory of Charles Martel over the Saracens 
at Tours, the voyages of Columbus, the defeat 
of the invincible Spanish Armada, and Napo- 
leon’s retreat from Moscow? ‘These are his- 
torical facts and as such they rest upon his- 
torical evidence. Of what value would our civil 


23 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


courts be? How could judges and juries verify 
in their own experiences the murders and thefts 
and robberies which have been committed? 
What shall we say of science? Can we verify 
in our own experience the atomic theory of 
matter, the Copernican theory of the solar sys- 
tem, or even the law of gravitation? It is true 
that these may be verified by experiment but 
not by subjective experience. Such a theory 
would destroy the bulk of man’s mental ac- 
quisitions in the past, for in the sum of human 
knowledge that which comes to a_ person 
through his own limited experience is compara- 
tively small. Hence if we were to accept Dr. 
Gordon’s dictum, in a variety of ways we should 
be left without rudder or compass or sail. 


To assume that the miracles of Jesus are 
improbable, simply because they cannot be veri- 
fied in human experience, is absurd. There are 
no inherent improbabilities in the miracles of 
Jesus. If He was in any sense divine, that is 
removed out of the category of ordinary men, 
we should expect the extraordinary in His life. 
Upon the hypothesis of His divinity, the mir- 


24 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


acles of Jesus, instead of being improbable, 
were rather to be expected. 


That He should have stilled the storm, 
changed the water into wine at Cana of Galilee, 
fed the five thousand in the wilderness, and 
healed the ills with which men were afflicted is 
no more strange nor improbable than that God 
today stills the storms upon the seas, by the al- 
chemy of nature turns water into wine in a 
thousand vineyards, feeds earth’s millions by 
the operation of the laws of the harvest, and 
still heals the diseases that flesh is heir to. 
There is not a physician in all the world who 
can heal disease. It is God who heals disease. 
Physicians may administer remedies, but unless 
these remedies cooperate with the laws of na- 
ture, which as we have insisted throughout are 
the laws of God, the remedies themselves will be 
unavailing. If my flesh is lacerated, no physi- 
cian in the world can make it grow together 
again; he may treat it with antiseptics to keep 
out infection which would interfere with nature’s 
laws, but it is in accordance with the laws of 
God that the wound heals. No physician in the 
world can make broken bones knit together 


25 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


again. He may set the bones and thus cooperate 
with God in the work of healing, but it is in 
conformity with the laws of God that the bones 
must knit. 


In performing his miracles Jesus was simply 
performing the functions of the sovereign power 
of God, and if divine this was of course to be 
expected. There are therefore no inherent im- 
probabilities in the miracles of Jesus. 


The question of the miracles cannot be set- 
tled ea cathedra. The only way in which this 
problem can be solved is by asking the question 
What were the facts? This we shall consider 
in the chapter which follows. 


26 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


27 





CHAPTER II. 
Tue Miracies or Jesus (Continued) 


The possibility, credibility, and probability 
of the miracles having been established, the next 
question to be considered is: What reasons have 
we for believing that Jesus actually performed 
the miracles which are attributed to Him? In 
other words what are the facts in the case? If, 
as is'sometimes intimated, it be not necessary 
to insist upon a belief in the miracles of Jesus 
as a test of Christian discipleship, nevertheless 
it is necessary to insist that all the disciples of 
Jesus shall face the facts concerning His mir- 
acles with the utmost candor, and then adjust 
their beliefs to those facts. 


The miracles of Jesus are alleged to be facts 
and as such they must be placed in the same 
category as the other alleged facts of history. 
Their worth or worthlessness is to be determined 
not by any presuppositions for or against mir- 
acles but by the weight of the evidence. Are 
they or are they not historical? That is the 
question to be settled in any final conclusion 
respecting the miracles of Jesus. 


29 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


The witnesses to the miracles are six or seven 
in number, all of the New Testament writers, 
save James and Jude, bearing testimony to one 
or more of the miracles of Jesus. (a) Were 
these witnesses competent? While they were 
not educated men so far as the learning of the 
schools is concerned, they were by no means il- 
literate men as their writings clearly show. 
They were men of ordinary acuteness and sound 
judgment. Among them or their associates, 
moreover, were men like Peter and Thomas, 
who could not easily be deceived. With the ex- 
ception of Luke and Paul, they were eye-wit- 
nesses of the facts which they record. Luke 
gathered his facts from a variety of sources, 
and in the main from those who were eye-wit- 
nesses. ‘I'he same may be said of the Apostle 
Paul, who also had the advantage of studying 
the facts from the Jewish as well as the Chris- 
tian standpoint. In any court of justice the 
competence of such witnesses would never be 
questioned. 


(b) Were these witnesses credible? It is a 
common rule of evidence accepted by our civil 
courts, that ordinarily a man will tell the truth, 


30 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


unless he has some motive to do otherwise. 
These men had no motive to be untruthful. 
They had nothing to gain thereby. They were 
preaching unpopular doctrines, for which most 
of them ultimately gave their lives, and it is 
utterly inconceivable that men would give their 
lives in defense of falsehoods. Moreover they 
are perfectly candid in their statements. They 
narrate incidents which are not altogether to 
their credit. They acknowledge their own 
doubts and their slowness to believe. To those 
who are acquainted with the nature of evidence, 
even the alleged discrepancies in their narratives 
confirm the truthfulness of their declarations 
with respect to the wonderful works of Jesus. 
All of these things combine to establish their 
trustworthiness as witnesses. 


With these preliminary observations as to 
the credibility of the witnesses, let us now con- 
sider the evidence. We have the testimony of 
the four evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and 
John, whose narratives contain the story of a 
great number of miracles wrought by Jesus 
during the years of his earthly ministry. We 
have the testimony of Peter in his sermon on 


31 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


the day of Pentecost when he said, “Jesus of 
Nazareth, a man approved of God among you 
by miracles and wonders and signs, which God 
did in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also 
know.” We have the testimony also of Peter 
and Paul to the greatest of all miracles, viz: 
the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. We 
shall however postpone to a subsequent chap- 
ter the consideration of the evidence respecting 
the resurrection of Jesus. While we have no 
desire to inject into the present discussion a 
question of Biblical criticism, nevertheless, if 
the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews be 
other than the apostle Paul we have his addi- 
tional testimony. (Cf. Heb. 2:3; 13:20.) 


The gospels also record the witness of others 
to the wonderful works of Jesus. Nicodemus, 
the ruler of the Jews, who came to Jesus by 
night, said: “Rabbi, we know that Thou art a 
teacher come from God: for no man can do the 
miracles which Thou doest, except God be with 
him.” On the return of Jesus to Nazareth 
after the commencement of His ministry, the 
people of the community, His old neighbors 
and acquaintances who had known Him from 


32 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


His boyhood, said: ‘From whence hath this 
man these things? and what wisdom is this 
which hath been given Him, that even such 
mighty works are wrought by His hands?” To 
the aspersions cast by the Jews upon Jesus, the 
blind man, whose eyes He had opened, replied: 
“If this man were not of God, He could do 
nothing.” 


Jesus himself pointed to the miracles as the 
credentials of His divine mission. In speaking 
of the Baptist, He said: “But I have greater 
witness than that of John: for the works which 
the Father hath given to me to finish, the same 
works that I do bear witness of me that the 
Father hath sent me.” ‘To the Jews who 
asked whether He was the Chrest, He replied: 
“The works that I do in my Father’s name, 
they bear witness of me.” When the disciples 
of John came asking, “Art Thou He that should 
come, or do we look for another?” Jesus an- 
answered: “Go and shew John again those things 
which ye do hear and see: The blind receive 
their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are 
cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised 
up, and the poor have the gospel preached to 


33 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


them. And blessed is he whosoever shall not be 
offended in Me.” In passing condemnation upon 
the cities of Galilee Jesus said ““Woe unto thee, 
Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the 
mighty works which were done in you had been 
done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have re- 
pented long ago in sackcloth and ashes... . And 
thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto 
heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if 
the mighty works which have been done in thee, 
had been done in Sodom, it would have remained 
until this day.” 


In his. miracles Jesus manifested his lordship 
over the forces of nature. At the wedding- 
feast, when the wine gave out, Jesus said to 
them, “Fill the waterpots with water. And 
they filled them to the brim. And he saith 
unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the 
governor of the feast. And they bare it. When 
the ruler of the feast had tasted the water 
that was made wine, and knew not whence it 
was (but the servants which drew the water 
knew) the governor of the feast called the 
bridegroom, and saith unto him, Every man at 
the beginning doth set forth good wine; and 


34 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


when men have well drunk, then that which is 
worse; but thou hast kept the good wine until 
now. This beginning of miracles did Jesus in 
Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; 
and his disciples believed on him.” 


When the multitudes followed Him into the 
wilderness he fed them, saying to His disciples, 
“How many loaves have ye? And they said, 
Seven and a few little fishes. And he com- 
manded the multitude to sit down on the ground. 
And He took the seven loaves, and the fishes, 
and gave thanks, and brake them, and gave to 
his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 
And they did all eat, and were filled: and they 
took up of the broken meat that was left seven 
baskets full. And they that did eat were four 
thousand men, besides women and children.” 


He stilled the winds and the waves. On one 
occasion when His disciples had embarked in a 
ship, while He remained to pray, “He saw them 
toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary 
unto them: and about the fourth watch of the 
night He cometh unto them, walking upon the 
sea, and would have passed by them. But when 
they saw him walking upon the sea, they sup- 


35 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


posed it had been a spirit, and cried out: for 
they all saw Him and were troubled. And) 
immediately He talked with them, and saith 
unto them. » Be of good cheer: it is I, be not 
afraid. And He went up unto them into the 
ship; and the wind ceased.” | 


On another occasion when Jesus was crossing 
the sea of Galilee with His disciples “there arose 
a great storm of wind, and the waves beat into 
the ship, so that it was now full. And He was 
in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pil- 
low: and they awake Him, and ‘say unto 
Him, Master, carest thou not that we perish? 
and He arose, and rebuked the wind, and said 
unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind 
ceased, and there was a great calm. And He 
said unto them, Why are ye so fearful? How 
is it that ye have no faith? And they feared 
exceedingly, and said one to another, What 
manner of man is this, that even the wind and 
the sea obey Him?” 


‘The mentally afflicted Jesus relieved. In that 
day the lunatic and the madman were turned 
loose upon society, except sometimes when they 
were bound with chains. Nothing was done to 


36 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


care for them or to alleviate their mental dis- 
tress. Their afflictions were attributed to de- 
moniacal possession. This opinion Jesus did not 
attempt to correct, but His ability to relieve 
such unfortunates cannot be doubted. “With 
authority commanded He even the unclean 
spirits.” Even His enemies recognized His 
power, but they declared: “He casteth out devils 
through Beelzebub the chief of devils.” 


Jesus not only relieved the mentally dis- 
tressed. He healed the sick. Of this we have 
abundant and sufficient evidence in all four of 
the Gospels. He cleansed the lepers. He caused 
the lame to walk. Sight He gave to the blind 
and hearing to the deaf. On three occasions 
He brought back the dead to life. Jairus, the 
ruler of the synagogue, besought Jesus to come 
and heal his daughter, but on the way to the 
house, one came saying, “Thy daughter is 
dead; trouble not the Master. But when Jesus 
heard it, He answered him saying, Fear not: 
believe only, and she shall be made whole. And 
when He came into the house, He suffered no 
man to go in, save Peter, and James, and John, 
and the father and the mother of the maiden. 


37 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


And all wept, and bewailed her; but He said, 
Weep not: she is not dead, but sleepeth. And 
they laughed Him to scorn, knowing that she 
was dead. And He put them all out, and took 
her by the hand, and called, saying, Maid arise. 
And her spirit came again, and she arose 
straightway.” 


As Jesus and his disciples entered the city 
of Nain, one day, “there was a dead man car- 
ried out, the only son of his mother, and she 
was a widow: and much people of the city was 
with her. And when the Lord saw her, He had 
compassion on her, and said unto her, Weep 
not. And He came and touched the bier; and 
they that bare Him stood still. And He said, 
Young man, I say unto thee, Arise. And he 
that was dead sat up, and began to speak. 
And He delivered him to his mother.” 


At Bethany Jesus stood before the grave of 
Lazarus and said, “Take ye away the stone. 
Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith 
unto Him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for 
he hath been dead four days. Jesus saith unto 
her, Said I not unto thee that if thou wouldest 
believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God? 


88 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


Then they took away the stone from the place 
where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted his 
eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou 
hast heard Me. And I knew that thou hearest 
Me always: but because of the people which 
stand by I said it, that they may believe that 
thou hast sent Me. And when He had thus 
spoken, He cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, 
come forth. And he that was dead came forth, 
bound hand and foot with grave-clothes: and 
his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus 
said unto them, Loose him, and let him go.” 


In all of the miracles which Jesus performed, 
during the brief years of His earthly ministry, 
He asserted His lordship over nature, treating 
its laws and forces as servants, ever subject to 
His will. 


The miracles of Jesus are an integral part 
of the story of His life. Frequently men say, 
“We can accept the wonderful teachings of 
Jesus and the story of His spotless life and 
character, but we cannot believe the miracles 
ascribed to Him.” In the gospel narratives the 
miracles of Jesus are so interwoven into the 
tapestry of His days and deeds that you can- 


39 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


not wrest them out without rending in pieces 
the whole fabric of His life. It is simply impos- 
sible to cast aside the testimony of the disciples 
to the wonderful works of Jesus. Either the 
story of His life, including his miracles, is true, 
or else it is a gigantic fraud and imposture. 


The miracles of Jesus distinguish Him from 
prophets and apostles. Moses and the prophets 
of old performed miracles, not through their 
own power and authority, but in the name of 
the most high God who had appointed them. 
Miracles were wrought by the apostles, but 
always in the name of Jesus. The seventy, 
whom Jesus had appointed, returned with joy, 
saying, “Lord, even the devils are subject unto 
us through Thy name.” 'To the lame man sit- 
ting in the temple, Peter said, ‘‘In the name of 
Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.” 
The next day, when asked by the authorities, 
“By what power, or by what name have ye done 
this??? Peter replied, “Be it known unto you 
all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the 
name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye 
crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even 
by Him doth this man stand here before you 


40 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


whole.” To A®neas, who had been sick of the 
palsy eight years, Peter said, “Jesus Christ 
maketh thee whole.” To the young woman pos- 
sessed of a spirt of divination, Paul said, “I 
command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to 
come out of her.” 


The miracles of Jesus, differing from those 
of prophets and apostles, were wrought by His 
own almighty power. ‘To the leper who wor- 
shipped Him, saying, “Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou 
canst make me clean,” Jesus stretched forth 
His hand and said, “I will; be thou clean.” 
“And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.” 


When Jesus said to the centurion, whose ser- 
vant was sick, “I will come and heal him,” the 
centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy that 
Thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak 
the word only, and my servant shall be healed. 
For I am a man under authority, having sol- 
diers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and 
he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; 
and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.” 
Jesus did not disclaim this ascription of power, 
but turned to His disciples, saying, “Verily I 
say unto you, I have not found so great faith, 


4] 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


no, not in Israel. And Jesus said unto the cen- 
turion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, 
so be it unto thee.” It is recorded that “his 
servant was healed in the selfsame hour.” 


When the storm arose on the sea of Galilee 
and his disciples were affrighted, Jesus, by His 
own authority and power, said to the winds and 
the waves, “Peace, be still.” ‘And the wind 
ceased and there was a great calm.” 


Jesus declared that “the Son of man hath 
power on earth to forgive sins,” but that decla- 
ration was linked with the healing of the man 
afflicted with palsy who was brought to Him on 
a bed, to whom Jesus in proof of His power to 
forgive sin, said, “Arise, take up thy bed and 
go unto thine own house.” And the man 
straightway arose and departed to his own 
house. 


Jesus affirmed that “the Son of man is Lord 
also of the Sabbath.” The observance of the 
Sabbath, in the popular estimation of the Jews 
of that time, was the most sacred requirement 
of their law. His lordship over the Sabbath, 
Jesus asserted in His miracles of healing. He 
was asked concerning the man with the with- 


42 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


ered hand, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath 
day?” 'To which He replied, “What man shall 
there be among you, that shall have one sheep, 
and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will 
he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How 
much then is a man better than a sheep? 
Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sab- 
bath days.” Then He said to the man, “Stretch 
forth thine hand.” And stretching it forth, his 
hand was restored like the other. 


The miracles of Jesus substantiate the claims 
which He made concerning Himself as well as 
those which were made by His disciples concern- 
ing Him. Jesus claimed identity with God, 
saying, “I and the Father are one;” “He that 
hath seen Me hath seen the Father.” But Jesus 
pointed to His miracles as the evidence of this 
identity, saying, “Believest thou not that I am 
in the Father and the Father in Me? The 
words that I speak unto you I speak not of 
Myself; but the Father that dwelleth in Me, 
He doeth the works. Believe Me that I am in 
the Father, and the Father in Me; or else be- 
lieve Me for the very works’ sake.” 

The disciples looked upon Jesus as God made 


43 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


manifest in the flesh, the very effulgence of His 
glory and the express image of His person. 
They reverenced Him as God. But it was the 
miracles which He performed which called forth 
this reverence and worship. At the miracu- 
lous draught of fishes Simon Peter fell down 
at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from Me; for 
I am a sinful man, O Lord.” After Jesus had 
come walking over the troubled waters, and the 
storm had subsided, “They that were in the 
ship came and worshipped Him, saying, Of a 
truth thou art the Son of God.” After the 
scribes and Pharisees had cast out the man 
born blind, because he had insisted that Jesus 
had healed him, the latter found the poor out- 
cast and asked, “Dost thou believe on the Son 
of God?” He answered, “Who is he, Lord, 
that I might believe on him?” Jesus said, ‘“Thou 
hast both seen Him and it is He that talketh 
with thee.” And the man said, “Lord, I be- 
lieve. And he worshipped Him.” 


After Jesus had left them, He was looked 
upon by His disciples as having ascended to the 
Father on high, where as our heavenly and 
eternal High-Priest He ever liveth to make inter- 


44 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


cession for us, whence He was to come at the 
end of the world to judge the quick and the 
dead. But this belief was based upon the 
miracle of His resurrection from the dead. 


The miracles of Jesus shed an interesting 
light upon His life and character, and reveal 
His loving sympathy for the needs and help- 
lessness of men. One day a leper came running 
to Him and beseeching Him said: “If thou wilt, 
thou canst make me clean.” And Jesus moved 
with compassion, put forth His hand and 
touched him and said unto him “I will; be thou 
clean.”” Once when Jesus had gone into the 
wilderness and the people had followed Him on 
foot out of the cities, “Jesus went forth and 
saw a great multitude, and was moved with 
compassion toward them, and He healed their 
sick.” Of the multitudes who followed Him 
into the wilderness on another occasion Jesus 
said: “I have compassion on the multitude, be- , 
cause they have now been with Me three days, 
and have nothing to eat.” That they might be 
fed He performed the miracle of the loaves and 
the fishes. When Jesus saw the widow of Nain 
bereft of her only son “He had compassion on 


45 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


her and said unto her, Weep not,” and restoring 
the son to life by the word of His power “He 
delivered him to his mother.” 


“He had compassion on them,” that was the 
keynote of every miracle which Jesus ever per- 
formed. When the Scribes and Pharisees came 
seeking a sign from Him, Jesus deliberately re- 
fused to give them a sign, saying, “An evil and 
adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and 
there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of 
the prophet Jonas.” When Pilate sent Jesus 
to Herod, the latter hailed His coming with 
delight because “he hoped to have seen some 
miracle done by Him.” But Jesus declined to 
gratify his curiosity, for He never performed 
a miracle merely for the sake of the miracle. 
Every miracle which He wrought was per- 
formed to minister to some human suffering or 
to relieve some human need. 


This study of the miracles of Jesus shows 
that they were so inextricably interwoven with 
the story of His life and message that if we are 
to accept at their face value His own words 
as well as the words of His disciples, we must 
accept the simple, straightforward accounts of 


46 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


the wonderful works which were wrought by His 
hands. There is no alternative. The story of 
His life and words stands or falls with the story 
of His wonderful deeds. If human testimony 
has any value whatsoever, if there is such a 
thing as historical evidence, we must accept the 
record of Jesus’ deeds as we find that record 
in the gospels. 


47 





THE INCARNATION 


49 





‘CHAPTER ITI. 
THE INCARNATION 


Back of the miracles of Jesus was the fact, 
the stupendous fact, of the Incarnation, God 
made manifest in the flesh. The Incarnation 
explains and makes credible all of the wonderful 
works which were wrought by the hands of 
Jesus. To some extent this has already been 
anticipated in the preceding chapters, but it 
deserves fuller consideration at this time. 


Divine, yet human, Jesus entered into all of 
the experiences of our earthly lot. Though con- 
ceived by the Holy Ghost in the womb of Mary 
He was born into this world as we all are 
born. Every step of the path that we must 
tread He has trodden. His development was a 
human development. He grew from infancy to 
youth and from youth to maturity as all others 
have grown. He early became inured to a life 
of poverty and toil. His hands were work- 
worn and calloused by honest toil. He has 
borne all of the burdens of our earthly life, pri- 


51 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


vations and hardships, temptation and perse- 
cution, pain and weariness, hunger and thirst, 
suffering and death. His humanity was a real 
humanity, and yet His life and character were 
not only unique but divine. 


It is simply impossible to place Jesus in the 
same category with other men. To express His 
identity with humanity Jesus spoke of himself 
as the Son of Man. But to express His rela- 
tionship with God, the Father, He alluded to 
Himself as the Son of God. A study of the life 
and character of Jesus from the standpoint of 
His Divine Sonship brings out certain facts 
which differentiate Him from the rest of man- 
kind. | 


As the Son of God, Jesus manifested the 
sinlessness of God. In the realm of moral char- 
acter he stands alone, unrivalled, supreme. 
Socrates confessedly was not perfect. Buddha 
attained to enlightenment only after struggles 
with sin long protracted. Upon the pages of 
the Koran we find abundant evidence of the 
moral unworthiness of Mohammed. Prophets 
and apostles have confessed their shortcomings 
and their moral failure. Moses, the great law- 


52 





THE INCARNATION 


giver, when summoned to become the deliverer 
of his people, confessed his unworthiness when 
he said, “Who am I, that I should go unto 
Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the 
children of Israel out of Egypt?” Isaiah, 
called to service, exclaimed, “Woe is me! for I 
am undone; because I am a man of unclean 
lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of 
unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, 
the Lord of hosts.” At the commencement 
of his discipleship Simon Peter cried out, “De- 
part from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” 
Saint Paul voices man’s bondage to sin and evil 
in these words: “For the good that I would I 
do not: but the evil which I would not, that I 
do ... TI find then a law, that, when I 
would do good, evil is present with me. . . O 
wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me 
from this body of death?” Jesus Christ is the 
one stainless character of the ages. No taint 
of sin or guilt ever defiled his soul. 


That Jesus was separate from sinners is 
evident from the fact that in Him was no con- 
sciousness of moral lack or failure. So perfect 
was His fellowship with the Father that He 


53 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


could say, “I do always those things that please 
Him.” So complete was His sense of victory 
over temptation that He exultingly said, “Be 
of good cheer, I have overcome the world.” 
To His enemies He gave the challenge, “Which 
of you convinceth Me of sin?” He taught His 
disciples to pray, “Forgive us our debts as we 
forgive our debtors,” but He offered no such 
prayer for Himself. In Him we find no tear of 
penitence, no prayer for pardon. 


Coupled with His sense of sinlessness was the 
consciousness of His ability to meet the moral 
needs of others, expressed in such sayings as 
“The Son of Man hath power on earth to for- 
give sins; “Come unto Me, all ye that labor 
and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest ;” 
“Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall 
give him shall never thirst; but the water that 
I shall give him shall be in him a well of water 
springing up into everlasting life;” “I am the 
way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh 
unto the Father but by Me;” “I am the light 
of the world: he that followeth Me shall not 
walk in darkness, but shall have the light of 
life.” 


54 





THE INCARNATION 


Herrmann says, “the fact that Jesus thought 
of Himself as sinless stands out powerfully be- 
fore us when we remember what He said and 
did at the Last Supper with His disciples. In 
face of a death whose horror He keenly felt, 
He was able to say that this death He was 
about to die would take away the burden of 
guilt, from the hearts of those who should re- 
member Him. . . Jesus could not have spo- 
ken as He did if He had been conscious of guilt 
within Himself. In that hour when the con- 
science of every man who is morally alive inexor- 
ably sums up his life, this man could conceive 
of His own moral strength and purity as that 
power which alone could conquer the sinner’s 
inmost heart and free him from the deepest 
need.” 


The sinlessness of Jesus is corroborated by 
the testimony of His disciples, not only in the 
spotless life which is presented in the four gos- 
ples, but by statements which refer to Him 
as “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from 
sinners ;” “And ye know that He was manifested 
to take away our sins; and in Him is no sin.” 
“For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who 


55 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


knew no sin;” “but was in all points tempted 
like as we are, yet without sin.” ‘“Forasmuch 
as ye know that ye were not redeemed with 
corruptible things as silver and gold, 

But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a 
lamb without blemish and without spot.” “Who 
did no sin, neither was guile found in His 
mouth.” 


The sinlessness of Jesus is further con- 
firmed by the witness of His enemies. Judas 
Iscariot, realizing the heinousness of his crime, 
cried out, “I have sinned in that I have be- 
trayed innocent blood.” The only testimony 
that was adduced against him before the Jew- 
ish Sanhedrin was perjured testimony, while 
the charges brought before the judgment seat 
of Pontius Pilate were so palpably false that 
after weighing the evidence, the Roman Pro- 
curator declared, “I find no fault in this man.” 
That is the verdict of the ages. For nineteen 
centuries the search-lights of criticism have 
been turned full upon the life and character of 
Jesus of Nazareth without revealing a single 
moral flaw. As von Ranke has said: “More 
guiltless and more powerful, more exalted and 


56 





THE INCARNATION 


more holy, has naught ever been on earth than 
His conduct, His life and His death; the human 
race knows nothing that could be brought, 
even afar off, into comparison with it.” 


As the Son of God, Jesus manifested the 
wisdom of God. His message was marvellously 
clear and simple so that “the common people 
heard Him gladly.” The officers who were sent 
to arrest Him returned with the statement, 
“Never man spake like this man.” He con- 
futed the wisest teachers of His time, and when 
in succesion He had discomfited and silenced 
the Herodians, the Sadducees and the Phari- 
sees, it was recorded, “Neither durst any man 
from that day forth ask Him any more ques- 
tions.” His teachings, He declared, should en- 
dure for all time, saying, “Heaven and earth 
shall pass away, but my words shall not pass 
away.” At the commencement of His ministry 
it was said “the people were astonished at His 
doctrine: for He taught them as one having 
authority, and not as the scribes.”” His teach- 
ings He placed, not on a level with the law and 
the prophets, but above the law and the 
prophets. The scribes and teachers of His 


57 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


time were constantly referring to the law and 
the traditions of the elders, saying, “It is writ- 
ten;” “It is said; but Jesus, setting aside 
their interpretations, declared, “Ye have heard 
that it hath been said by them of old time... 
but I say unto you,” and then He would pro- 
ceed to let in such a flood of light upon some old 
passage or teaching as to give it an entirely new 
significance and meaning. The teachings of 
the law, He summarized into two simple state- 
ments, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with 
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with 
all thy mind. This is the first and great com- 
mandment. And the second is like unto it, 
Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On 
these two commandments hang all the law and 
the prophets.” Nowhere in all literature, past 
or present, can we find so clear, so concise, and 
yet so comprehensive a setting forth of the life 
of human duty, as that which is contained in 
that simple yet impressive document known as 
the Sermon on the Mount. 


In His teachings He reversed the common 
conceptions of his countrymen. They looked 
for a Messiah who should reign as an earthly 


58 








THE INCARNATION 


king and bring all nations under his sway. 
Instead of sitting upon a royal throne Jesus 
taught that the Son of Man must suffer humilia- 
tion and sorrow and death. Through His death 
those forces were to be awakened which should 
revolutionize humanity and redeem the world. 
“Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground 
and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bring- 
eth forth much fruit.” ‘And I, if be lifted up 
from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” 
His kingdom was to be a spiritual kingdom, 
a kingdom “not of this world.” In that king- 
dom service and not authority should govern. 
“Ye know that they which are accounted to 
rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over 
them; and their great ones exercise authority 
upon them. But so shall it not be among you: 
but whosoever will be great among you shall be 
your minister: and whosoever of you will be 
chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the 
Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but 
to eae and give His life a ransom for 
pany 


He gave to the world a new conception of 
God. There are glimpses of the nearness and 


59 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


fatherhood of God in the Old Testament, but 
the usual picture is that of a God afar off, a 
sovereign king, whose throne was in the highest 
heavens, and who was surrounded by a wall of 
fire and smoke. No man could look upon the 
face of God and live. But Jesus always inter- 
prets God in terms of His divine fatherhood, 
speaking of Him as “My Father” and “your 
Father” and “our Father.” In a single par- 
able, the parable of the Prodigal Son, He gives 
to us a truer picture of the yearning and suf- 
fering love of God than is found in all the law 
and the prophets. All that an earthly father 
is to us, God is and more. “If ye then, being 
evil, know how to give good gifts unto your 
children, how much more shall your Father 
which is in heaven give good things to them 
that ask Him.” The conception which Jesus 
gives to us of God, the universal mind instinct- 
ively recognizes as true. 


All that we know of the future life is con- 
tained in the words of Jesus. Although con- 
stantly assuming the fact of the future life, the 
Old Testament says comparatively little about 
it. Like a breath of heavenly music the thought 


60 





THE INCARNATION 


of the future life runs through all of the teach- 
ings of Jesus. The patriarchs of old, Abraham, 
and Isaac, and Jacob, had not passed into a 
dreamless sleep but were alive, because “God 
was not the God of the dead but of the living.” 
He declared himself to be the author of ever- 
lasting life, saying, “Everyone which seeth the 
Son and believeth on Him may have everlasting 
life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” 
The life to come, He affirmed to be a continua- 
tion of the life that now is: “I am the resur- 
rection and the life: he that believeth in Me, 
though he were dead, yet shall he live: and 
whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never 
die.” For the larger and fuller life that 
stretches out beyond the grave, men were to 
make preparation here and now: “Lay not up 
for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth 
and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break 
through and steal: but lay up for yourselves 
treasures in heaven.” The rewards for service 
would continue into eternity: “Verily I say unto 
you, there is no man that hath left house, or 
parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the 
kingdom of God’s sake, who shall not receive 
manifold more in this present time, and in the 


6] 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


world to come life everlasting.” Jesus looked 
forward to receiving His disciples into the fel- 
lowship of that nobler and higher existence, 
saying, “Let not your heart be troubled: ye be- 
lieve in God, believe also in Me. In My Fath- 
er’s house are many mansions: if it were not so 
I would have told you. I go to prepare a place 
for you: and if I go and prepare a place for 
you, I will come again, and receive you unto 
myself ; that where I am, there ye may be also.” 
If the words of Jesus relative to the future life 
were to be blotted out, there would be very 
little left for us to cling to, since all of the 
utterances of the apostles derive their strength 
and support from the words of Jesus. | 


As the Son of God, Jesus manifested the 
patience of God. Without murmuring He 
endured all of the trials and tribulations of 
His earthly lot. He was unmoved by the scoffs 
and scorns of men. With consummate tact and 
skill He dealt with the want of understanding 
on the part of His disciples and their slowness 
of heart to believe. There was but one thing 
which could move him to indignation and that 
was the wicked perversity of men. He over- 


62 





THE INCARNATION 


turned the seats of the money changers and 
cast out of the temple those that bought and 
sold doves, saying, “Is it not written, My house 
shall be called of all nations the house of 
prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.” 
The woes which He pronounced upon the scribes 
and Pharisees for their baseness, hypocrisy, and 
shameléss insincerity furnish added evidence of 
the strength of His moral purpose, for a char- 
acter which was incapable of moral indignation 
assuredly could not be perfect. Injustice to- 
wards Himself Jesus met with unfailing gentle- 
ness, meekness and forbearance, but injustice 
towards others stirred Him to the depths of His 
being. The instances recorded in the gospels 
of the occasions when He was moved to indig- 
nation awaken our moral approbation rather 
than otherwise, for a patience which under such 
circumstances could *~ blind and dumb would 
not reflect the patience of God. 


The storm clouds gathered thick and fast 
about Him, but with unfaltering purpose He 
pursued His onward way, knowing that He 
must tread at last the via dolorosa, the bitter 
path of tears, that led to Calvary and death. 


63 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


The shadows of night closed in about Him, but 
they did not swerve Him from His course. We 
have no more impressive example of a patience 
that was divine than that which He manifested 
amidst the experiences through which he passed 
during His passion in the Garden of Geth- 
semane. 


At a time when He most felt the need for 
human sympathy and friendship He said to His 
disciples, “My soul is exceeding sorrowful even 
unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with Me.” 
Having so spoken He went a little farther and 
prayed, “O Father, if it be possible, let this 
cup pass from Me: nevertheless not as I will, 
but as Thou wilt.” Disobedient to His injunc- 
tion and overcome by physical exhaustion, the 
disciples succumbed to sleep. When He found 
them thus, not in anger but in pained surprise 
He asked, “What, could ye not watch with Me 
one hour?” We can well imagine the words of 
stinging rebuke which such conduct would have 
called forth from some earthly ruler, but not 
one word of condemnation or reproof did Jesus 
utter, and when His disciples had no explana- 
tion to offer in extenuation of their negligence, 


64 


THE INCARNATION 


see how He excuses them, saying, “The spirit in- 
deed is willing but the flesh is weak.” When a 
second and a third time they had fallen asleep 
He said, “Sleep on now, and take your rest: be- 
hold the hour is at hand, and the Son of man 
is betrayed into the hands of sinners.” 


Again we witness that same God-like patience, 
when friendless and alone He stood before the 
judgment seat of Pontius Pilate. Though “He 
was reviled, He reviled not again.” Contrast 
His attitude, calm and self-composed, with the 
relentless hate of the angry multitude as they 
cried, “Away with Him, crucify Him, crucify 
Him!” Surely “He was brought as a lamb to 
the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shear- 
ers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth.” 
Behold Him as they strip His raiment from 
Him, placing a purple robe upon him and plac- 
ing upon his brows a crown of thorns, while 
amidst mocking laughter and ribald oaths they 
hail Him as a king! Witness the repeated in- 
dignities to which He was subjected and the 
cruel scourging which He suffered at the hands 
of His persecutors. Yet with unwearying pa- 
tience He endures it all and under the weight of 


65 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


His own cross staggers away towards the tragic 
spot on Golgotha where He is to offer up Him- 
self as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. 


As the Son of God, Jesus manifested the love 
of God. In His teachings, as we have already 
seen, Jesus unfolded the idea of God as a loving, 
compassionate heavenly father who sympathizes 
with human weakness and sorrows over human 
sins. As a man, entering into loving, helpful, 
sympathetic human relationships, Jesus re- 
vealed the very heart and character of God. 
The whole purpose of His life expresses itself 
in the pouring out of His soul for the good of 
others and in His ceaseless activity to bring 
men, all men, into fellowship and communion 
with the Father. The friend of publicans and 
sinners, He gave Himself without reserve to the 
lowly, the suffering and the sinful. His was a 
love which knew no bounds. “Greater love hath 
no man than this, that a man lay down his life 
for his friends.” That was the highest type of 
love that the world had ever known. Jesus of 
Nazareth, however, laid down His life not only 
for His friends, but for His enemies and per- 
secutors, for those who mocked, despised, and 


66 


THE INCARNATION 


hated Him. . Amidst the agonies of His dying 
hour, unmindful of His own sufferings and 
thinking only of the blindness of His foes and 
tormentors, He looked heavenward and prayed, 
“Father, forgive them; for they know not 
what they do.” Contrasting the death of Soc- 
rates, the Athenian philosopher, with the 
tragedy on Calvary, Rosseau said, “If Socrates 
died like a philosopher, Christ died like a God.” 


The cross of Christ reveals a love which goes 
all lengths and withholds nothing that sinning 
men may be reconciled to God. It is not enough 
to tell men that God loves them. Sin has so 
alienated and estranged their hearts that the 
mere declaration of God’s forgiving love is not 
in itself sufficiently convincing. But no one 
looking to the cross of Calvary can for one 
moment doubt God’s willingness to receive and 
forgive His erring children. So throughout all 
ages, men and women storm-tossed upon the 
sea of life, battling against the billows of temp- 
tation and sin, struggling in the darkness of 
doubt and despair, have looked to the crucified 
Redeemer as the rock of their deliverance and 
in Him they have found peace. 


67 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


How shall we account for the wonderful 
Teacher of Nazareth? What explanation shall 
we offer for Him who manifested the love, the 
patience, the wisdom, and the sinlessness of 
God? ‘The disciples, who for three years had 
sat at His feet, had drunk in His words, and 
had felt the power of His matchless personality, 
believed Him to be the divine Son of God. They 
worshipped Him as God. Prayers were offered 
in His name. They looked upon Him as ex- 
alted to the right hand of God, the Father, on 
high, where as our heavenly and eternal High 
Priest He ever liveth to make intercession for 
men, whence He was to come at the end of all 
things, to judge the quick and the dead, and to 
receive into everlasting life all who had believed 
in His name. Through His name alone salva- 
tion was to be obtained. “Neither is there sal- 
vation in any other: for there is none other 
name under heaven given among men, whereby 
we must be saved.” The men who held these 
beliefs were Jewish monotheists, steeped in all 
of the prejudices of their race, with the firm 
conviction that Jehovah, their God, was su- 
preme, and yet so fully convinced were they that 
Jesus was not only divine but co-equal with 


68 


THE INCARNATION 


God, that they were willing to lay down their 
lives in His name, not counting their lives dear 
unto themselves. 


In the light of all the facts this is the only 
logical conclusion to which we can come. There 
is but one hypothesis upon which we can account 
for the unique life and character of Jesus, and 
that is that He was the divine Son of God. 


We cannot account for the character of 
Jesus upon the basis of heredity. There is truth 
in the old adage that “blood will tell.” But this 
affords no adequate explanation for the wonder- 
ful life of Jesus. It is true that He was of the 
house and lineage of David. But many gen- 
erations intervened between David and Jesus 
without a distinguished representative of that 
family. The mother of Jesus seems to have been 
a remarkable woman. Yet there is nothing 
about Mary which will account for her won- 
derful Son. She was the mother of other chil- 
dren, who seem to have been common-place in- 
dividuals, possessed of none of the remarkable 
qualities of Jesus. His fellow-townsmen felt 
that there was nothing in the family from which 
He came that would account for the wonderful 


/ 


69 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


words and works of Jesus, for they said, “From 
whence hath this Man these things? and what 
wisdom is this which hath been given unto Him, 
that even such mighty works are wrought by 
His hands? Is not this the carpenter, the Son 
of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and 
of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here 
with us?” 


We cannot account for Jesus on the basis of 
His education or environment. He may have 
attended the village school at Nazareth, but His 
parents were too poor to send Him to Jerusa- 
lem to sit at the feet of Gamaliel or any of the 
other great teachers of His time. If he had 
attended the village school, His education was 
interrupted at a very early age and He was 
obliged to enter the shop of Joseph to learn the 
carpenter’s trade at which He worked for a 
number of years in and about Nazareth, so that 
the people of His time asked, “How knoweth 
this Man letters, having never learned?” His 
teachings, to be sure, were colored by His en- 
vironment, for He alludes to the birds of the 
air, the gorgeous coloring of the lilies of the 
field, and to the customs of His time, but there 


70 


THE INCARNATION 


was nothing about the obscure village of Naza- 
reth, where He was reared and in which He 
spent His youth and early manhood, to produce 
real greatness of character. Indeed in con- 
tempt it was asked, “Can there any good thing 
come out of Nazareth?” 


We cannot account for the character of Jesus 
by the race from which He sprang. He was 
indeed the child of a great race, a race which 
in the past produced a Moses, a David, an 
Elijah, an Isaiah, and an Ezekiel, a race, 
moreover, which in subsequent times has pro- 
duced a Ricardo, a Disraeli, a Mendelssohn, a 
Heine, and a Spinoza. Other great characters 
may be classified by the race or nation to which 
they have belonged. Confucius was a China- 
man, Socrates was a Greek, Cesar was a 
Roman, Cromwell and Gladstone were English- 
men, Richelieu and Voltaire were French, Goethe 
and Bismarck were Germans, Washington and 
Lincoln were Americans, but Jesus Christ be- 
longs to no race or country, for He alone is the 
universal Man. ‘The Jews of His time were 
narrow, exclusive and intolerant. They thought 
much of a kingdom but it was a kingdom of 


71 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


this world, a kingdom for themselves. They 
alone of all mankind were the chosen people of 
God. Upon all others they looked with un- 
mixed contempt. Their religion was one of 
imposing pomp and ceremonial, while they per- 
ceived but dimly, if at all, the spirituality of 
worship. They made great pretensions to 
righteousness, but it was an outward form of 
righteousness rather than that of the heart. 
Jesus of Nazareth was as far removed from the 
narrowness and exclusiveness of His race as a 
man well could be; hence the impossibility of 
accounting for His life and teachings by the 
race from which He sprang. 


We cannot account for Jesus Christ by the 
age in which He lived. He is the Man of the 
ages. Most men are the children of their time. 
Martin Luther may have had qualities which in 
any age would have attracted attention, but 
at no other period of human history could he 
have been the great reformer that he was. We 
cannot conceive of Washington in any age as 
being other than a great and good man, but in 
no other age could he have been the Father of 
his country. Had Abraham Lincoln lived a 


72 


Ee 


THE INCARNATION | 


hundred years before he did, his name never 
would have gone down into history as the pre- 
server of his country and the emancipator of 
millions. Jesus Christ was not the product of 
the age in which he lived. It was a cruel and 
merciless age. Licentiousness ran riot. In- 
fanticide was common. In the arena armed 
gladiators fought one another to the death or 
amidst the plaudits of the spectators were torn 
from limb to limb by wild beasts made ravenous 
by hunger. Crimes of violence were frequent. 
Cicero was murdered. Julius Cesar met death 
at the hands of his friends. Herod, who ruled 
at Jerusalem, caused his wife, Mariamne, and 
his two sons to be murdered, slaughtered the 
innocents of Bethlehem, and dying commanded 
that his nobles should be executed that the 
mourning at his death might be wide-spread. 
The cruel and blood-thirsty Nero was more 
truly the representative of that period than the 
meek and lowly Galilean. Whatever else He 
was, Jesus of Nazareth was not the product of 
the age in which He lived. 


We cannot account for the character of 
Jesus upon the hypothesis of evolution. If his 


73 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


character was in any sense the product of evo- 
lution, then we might expect those same evolu- 
tionary processes to bring forth like results 
in the lives of others. But in the realm of moral 
character Jesus Christ has had neither rival nor 
equal. He stands absolutely alone. It is im- 
possible to place Him in the same category with 
other men. There is no saint, no prophet, no 
philosopher, no poet, no statesman, no hero, no 
reformer with whom to compare Him. Through- 
out the ages there has been absolutely no other 
who could say as He said, “Follow Me:” “I am 
the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh 
unto the Father, but by Me.” 


There is but one hypothesis upon which we 
can account for the unique life and character 
of Jesus, and that is that He is the divine Son of 
God, “the only begotten of the Father, full of 
grace and truth.” If Jesus Christ be not divine, 
then He is the insoluble enigma of the ages. 
Upon no possible basis can we account for the 
life of Jesus of Nazareth as that of an ordinary 
man. The story of the life of Jesus from His 
birth to His death and resurrection, as that 
story is unfolded in the Gospels, is thoroughly 


74 


THE INCARNATION 


consistent and harmonious. His words and 
His works dovetail together. When examined 
without bias or prejudice, the evidence leads ir- 
resistibly to the belief that Jesus was “the 
only begotten of the Father, full of grace and 
truth.” Accepting the hypothesis of His di- 
vinity the miracles ascribed to Jesus at once 
become credible. ‘If God is possible, miracle is 
possible.” ‘That is the inevitable and inescap- 
able conclusion to which the premise of Theism 
drives us. He who came from God, indeed was 
God made manifest in the flesh, could turn water 
into wine, could still the winds and the sea, 
could feed the five thousand with a few loaves 
and some small fishes, could heal the sick, allevi- 
ate the demented, cleanse the leper, and bring 
back to life again them that were dead. 


75 


Rr PDE ath te A 
We a PT atts SEW A Di 


‘ hav 
ieee 


} 





THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


77 


Pveuarys +f, 
Me gti aes 


> eM 





CHAPTER IV. 
THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


Special attention must be given to the Virgin 
birth of Jesus since the assaults upon the mir- 
aculous are often concentrated against this 
miracle. ‘There are those who declare that the 
doctrine of the Virgin birth in no way affects 
the credibility of Christianity, that it is a hind- 
rance rather than otherwise to Christian faith, 
because it places the birth of Jesus on a level 
with the myths current in the ancient world 
asserting the supernatural births of other cele- 
_ brated personages. Any consideration of the 
miracles connected with the life of Jesus must, 
therefore, include an examination into the cred- 
ibility of this miracle. 


A distinction, no doubt, is to be made between 
the fact of the Virgin birth and the validity of 
that fact for religious faith. There may be, 
and doubtless are, many professing Christians 
who have given little or no thought to the doc- 
trine of the Virgin birth and who are devoted 


79 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


followers of Jesus, entirely apart from that doc- 
trine. T'o argue on that account that the Vir- 
gin birth is unimportant and therefore a non 
essential is fallacious. Our estimate of the 
Divine yet human Christ is based upon the facts 
recorded in the four gospels. ‘These are our 
only sources of knowledge concerning His life. 
If our estimate of the person of Jesus is to be 
accurate, not one of these facts may be omitted 
or ignored. No exception is to be made to the 
Virgin birth. Its implications are too import- 
ant and too far-reaching for such evasion. This 
fact we should face with the same candor and 
honesty as we face all other facts in the life of 
Jesus. 


Believing in the deity of Jesus we could 
hardly escape a presupposition in favor of His 
supernatural birth. If Jesus Christ was the 
divine Son of God it was to be expected that 
His birth as well as His life would differ from 
that of all other men. Under the old apologetic 
it was customary to establish our Lord’s divine 
nature by His supernatural birth. Let us re- 
verse the process. Instead of saying that the 
Virgin birth proves the divine life, let us say 


80 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


that His divine life makes credible His super- 
natural birth. A unique life necessitates a 
unique birth. The uniqueness of Jesus’ life 
establishes His divine character, and accepting 
His divine character, His miraculous birth not 
only becomes credible but necessary. 


Speaking of the relation of the Virgin birth 
to the Incarnation, Dr. Charles Briggs said: 
“The philosophical difficulties which beset the 
doctrine of the Virgin Birth do not concern the 
Virgin Birth in particular, but the Incarnation 
in general. Indeed, the doctrine of the Virgin 
Birth seems to be the only way of overcoming 
the chief difficulties. If the pre-existent Son of 
God became incarnate by ordinary generation, 
we could not escape the conclusion that a human 
individual person was begotten. The Incarna- 
tion would then not be a real Incarnation, but 
an inhabitation of Jesus by the Son of God, 
with two distinct personalities, that of the pre- 
existent Son of God and that of the begotten 
son of Joseph. . . . The man Jesus would 
be a prophet, a hero, a great exemplar, but not 
the Saviour of mankind. He might be the last 
and greatest of the heroes of the Faith, but 


81 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


not God Incarnate. Only a God-man who had 
taken human nature into organic union with 
Himself and so identified Himself with the human 
race as to become the common man, the second 
Adam, the head of the race, could redeem the 
race. The doctrine of the Virgin Birth gives such 
a God-man. Natural generations could not pos- 
sibly give us such a God-man. Therefore, the 
doctrine of the Virgin Birth is essential to the 
integrity of the Incarnation, as the Incarnation 
is to the doctrine of Christ and Christian Sal- 
vation.” 


Accepting then, upon the basis of His unique 
life and character, the fact of the Incarnation, 
that Jesus was God made manifest in the flesh, 
it was not merely to be expected, but, as has 
already been intimated, necessary that His birth 
should differ from that of all other men. ‘The 
New Testament contains two accounts of the 
birth of Jesus. The first of these, the briefer 
account in Matthew’s gospel, tells us that before 
the nuptials had been celebrated, Mary, the 
espoused wife of Joseph “Was found with child 
of the Holy Ghost.” Supposing that she had 
been untrue to her betrothal vows, “Joseph, her 


82 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


husband, being a just man, and not willing to 
make her a public example, was minded to put 
her away privily.” While he was meditating 
on these things “the angel of the Lord ap- 
peared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, 
thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee 
Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in 
her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring 
forth a son, and thou shalt call His name 
JESUS: for He shall save His people from 
their sins.’ This, Matthew declared to be a 
fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah: “Behold 
a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring 
forth a Son, and they shall call His name 
Eromanuel, which being interpreted is God 
with us.” 


Luke gives us a much fuller account, telling 
of the visit of the Angel Gabriel who came to 
Mary saying, “Hail, thou that art highly fav- 
ored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou 
among women.” Mary was greatly disturbed 
by this salutation, but the angel reassured her, 
“Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor 
with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in 
thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and shalt 


83 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


call His name JESUS, He shall be great, and 
shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the 
Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of 
His father David: and He shall reign over the 
house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom 
there shall be no end.” Mary asked the very 
natural question, “How shall this be, seeing I 
know not a man?” But the angel replied, “The 
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power 
of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore 
also that holy thing which shall be bern of thee 
shall be called the Son of God.” On a visit to 
her counsin Elizabeth, Mary expressed her ex- 
ultation in the Magnificat: 


“My soul doth magnify the Lord, 

And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Sa- 
viour. 

For He hath regarded the low estate of His 
handmaiden: 

For, behold, from henceforth all generations 
shall call me blessed. 

For He that is mighty hath done to me great 
things ; 

And holy is His name. 

And His mercy is on them that fear Him 


84 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


From generation to generation. 

He hath shewed strength with His arm; 

He hath scattered the proud in the imagina- 
tion of their hearts. 

He hath put down the mighty from their seats, 

And exalted them of low degree. 

He hath filled the hungry with good things; 

And the rich He hath sent empty away. 

He hath holpen His servant Israel, 

In remembrance of His mercy. 

As He spake to our fathers. 

To Abraham, and to his seed forever.” 


Although these two stories of the conception 
of Jesus differ in minor details, thus indicating 
that they are independent accounts, neverthe- 
less they supplement each other and both are 
agreed that the birth of Jesus was the direct 
result, without human intervention, of the ac- 
tion of the Holy Spirit upon the womb of the 
Virgin Mary. 


Exception is taken to the Virgin birth of 
Jesus on the ground that it is biologically im- 
possible. Because a thing is inexplicable it is 
not necessarily impossible. ‘With God all 


85 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


things are possible.” The late Prof. Huxley 
wrote, “The mysteries of the Church are child’s 
play compared with the mysteries of Nature. 
The doctrine of the Trinity is not more puzzling 
than the necessary antinomies of physical 
speculation; virgin procreation and resuscita- 
tion from apparent death are ordinary phe- 
nomena for the naturalist.” 


Life is a mystery which to the human under- 
standing is inexplicable. Who can explain the 
mystery of the tiniest blossoms that dot the 
hill-side? How is it that generation after gen- 
eration the different plants and creatures go 
on reproducing after their kind? We are fa- 
miliar with the processes of life, but back of 
these is the inexplicable mystery of life. ‘The 
supreme mystery, of course, was the creation of 
life in the first instance. God is the author of 
life. Can the Creator be less than His crea- 
tures? If He has endowed beings with the 
power of transmitting the germ of life to other 
beings like unto themselves, by the natural pro- 
cesses of generation, is it not reasonable to 
suppose that the Great Author of life can im- 
plant the germ of life in one of His own crea- 


86 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


tures? From a biological standpoint, in the 
last analysis, there can be no inherent impossi- 
bility in the Virgin birth of Jesus, since He who 
breathed into the nostrils of man the breath of 
life certainly had the power without human 
intervention to implant within the womb of 
Mary the spirit of the pre-existent Christ in 
order that the Word might be made flesh. 


Exception to the Virgin birth is taken on the 
ground that a supernatural origin was at- 
tributed to other notable persons of antiquity 
such as Plato, the philosopher, and such rulers 
as Alexander the Great and Augustus Cesar. 
Because spurious coins sometimes get into cir- 
culation that is no reason why we should dis- 
card the perfectly good pieces of money that 
pass from hand to hand. That would be a pre- 
posterous proceeding. ‘The only wise course to 
pursue is to discriminate between the false and 
the true. The same principle applies here. The 
fact that any number of persons were alleged to 
- be supernaturally born would not in itself mili- 
tate against the Virgin birth of Jesus. How- 
ever, there is absolutely no analogy between the 
gospel account of the birth of Jesus and the 


87 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


fabulous stories, invented with the intent to 
flatter, that Plato was the son of Apollo, Alex- 
ander of Zeus, and Augustus of Apollo. There 
is not the slightest suggestion of a virgin birth 
in the case of any of these men, who are coarsely 
described as offspring from the illicit inter- 
course between the gods and their mothers. The 
attempt to place the chaste and sublimely beau- 
tiful account of the conception of Jesus, as 
found in the gospel records, on a level with 
stories so crude and gross, savors not only of 
the absurd but of the blasphemous. 


Exception to the Virgin birth of Jesus is 
taken on scriptural grounds. In the gospels 
Jesus is referred to as follows: “Is not this the 
carpenter’s son?” “Is not this Joseph’s Son?” 
“Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” At 
the age of twelve Jesus accompanied his parents 
to Jerusalem and, fascinated by the things 
which he saw and heard, lingered behind after 
they had started on their homeward journey, 
but “Joseph and Mary knew not of it.” When 
they found Him in the temple after three days’ 
searching, His mother said, “Son, why hast 
thou dealt thus with us? Behold thy father 


88 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


and I have sought thee sorrowing.” Upon the 
basis of these passages it is argued that Jesus 
was the natural son of Joseph. But with a 
single exception these passages are found in 
the gospels of Luke and Matthew which tell the 
story of the Virgin birth. That the particu- 
lars of His birth were not widely published is 
evident from the statement, “but Mary kept 
all these things and pondered them in her heart.” 
Being reared in the home of Joseph and Mary, 
why should those, who had no intimate knowl- 
edge of the facts, think of Jesus as other than 
the son of Joseph? In Luke’s gospel we have 
a statement which sheds a flood of light upon 
this matter, “And Jesus Himself began to be 
about thirty years of age, being (as was sup- 
posed) the son of Joseph.” Such being the 
supposition, why should not Jesus be referred 
to as the son of Joseph? This is a perfectly 
logical and natural explanation of the passages 
referred to and shows that they do not in any 
wise contradict the idea of the Virgin birth. 


Further objection to the Virgin birth is of- 
fered on the ground that the narratives of the 
miraculous conception of Jesus, incorporated 


89 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


in the gospels according to Matthew and Luke, 
are interpolations or additions made to the 
original documents by later writers. But when 
such objectors are confronted by the fact that 
all of the earliest manuscripts, without excep- 
tion, contain these narratives, the argument is 
advanced that they are untrustworthy and 
therefore to be rejected because of the silence 
of Mark, John, and Saint Paul upon this sub- 
ject. Supposing we were to adopt the same 
principle with reference to all of the facts in 
the life of our Saviour and should accept those 
only which were recorded in all four of the gos- 
pels and the writings of Saint Paul, what would 
happen? We should be obliged to reject the 
story of the temptation of Jesus; the Sermon on 
the Mount, including the Beatitudes, the 
Lord’s Prayer, and the Golden Rule; many of 
the great parables of Jesus, including the par- 
ables of the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal 
Son. We should be obliged to reject the inter- 
view with Nicodemus, including that wonderful 
declaration, the most wonderful in the Bible, 
“For God so loved the world that He gave His 
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in 


90 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


Him should not perish, but have everlasting 
life.” We should be obliged to reject the con- 
versation with the woman of Samaria, including 
the pronouncement, “But the hour cometh, and 
now is, when the true worshippers shall worship 
the Father in spirit and in truth: for the 
Father seeketh such to worship Him. God is a 
Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship 
Him in spirit and in truth.” We should be 
obliged to reject those words of Jesus, which 
throughout all ages have brought comfort to 
multitudes of sorrowing hearts, “Let not your 
heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also 
in Me. In My Father’s house are many man- 
sions: if it were not so I would have told you. I 
go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and 
prepare a place for you, I will come again, and 
receive you unto myself; that where I am there 
ye may be also.” We should have a sadly mu- 
tilated New Testament, if we were to insist that 
everything be rejected except what was found 
in every one of the four gospels and the epistles 
of Saint Paul. 


Let us analyze the alleged silences of Mark, 
John, and Saint Paul. The gospel of Mark 


91 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


contains no reference at all to the birth of 
Jesus. Are we justified on that account in 
denying that Jesus ever was born? ‘The sort 
of logic which would deny the Virgin birth of 
Jesus because no mention was made of it might 
with equal reason deny the fact that Jesus ever 
was born. Such an argument deserves no seri- 
ous consideration. But if the gospel of Mark 
makes no mention of the Virgin birth it as- 
sumes the divine paternity of Jesus. Mark 
commences his narrative with the impressive 
statement, “The beginning of the gospel of 
Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” 


Saint John, the evangelist, is equally em- 
phatic in assuming the divine origin of Jesus. 
In the opening chapter of his gospel he says: 
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
was with God, and the Word was God. The 
same was in the beginning with God. All things 
were made by Him; and without Him was not 
anything made that was made. . . And the 
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and 
we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only 
begotten of the Father, full of grace and 
truth.” 


92 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


In telling the story of the first miracle, that 
at the wedding in Cana of Galilee, John says, 
“And when they wanted wine, the mother of 
Jesus saith unto Him, They have no wine. 
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to 
do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come. 
‘His mother saith unto the servants, Whatso- 
ever He saith unto you, doit.” That is a state- 
ment pregnant with meaning, implying as it 
does that in the consciousness or subconscious- 
ness of Mary was the memory of those wonder- 
ful happenings at the birth of Jesus which led 
her to believe that in entering upon His minis- 
try wonderful things would be wrought by His 
hands. 


These passages in John’s gospel certainly are 
not at variance with the statements in the Gos- 
pels of Matthew and Luke describing the Vir- 
gin birth, but, to borrow an expression from 
Paley, are what might be termed “undesigned 
coincidences” to corroborate that fact. 


93 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


To say that the Apostle Paul knew nothing 
about the Virgin birth of Jesus expresses it 
rather strongly to say the least. The argu- 
ment from silence is an argument that works 
both ways. If Saint Paul said nothing in favor 
of the Virgin birth, he certainly said nothing 
against it. In fact so far as the inferences 
from his writings are concerned, they favor 
rather than oppose the doctrine of the Virgin 
birth. In his Epistle to the Galatians, he says, 
“But when the fulness of the time was come 
God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, 
made under the law.” It would have been just 
as easy and at the same time perfectly natural 
for the great apostle to have said that Jesus 
was the child of Jewish parents and therefore 
born under the law, the very point that he was 
trying to make. But again this “undesigned 
coincidence” in reality confirms and corrobo- 
rates the Virgin birth. 


O4 


THE VIRGIN BIRTH 


If Saint Paul’s wonderful description of the 
humiliation of Jesus in his epistle to the Phil- 
ippians does not suggest an acquaintance with 
the Virgin birth, it assuredly is as strong a 
statement of the divine origin of Jesus as could 
be asked: “Who being in the form of God, 
thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 
but made Himself of no reputation, and took 
on Him the form of a servant, and was made 
in the likeness of men: and being found in fash- 
ion as a man, He humbled Himself and became 
obedient unto death, even the death of the 
cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted 
Him and given Him a name which is above every 
name.” 


It must be remembered that Paul was no 
biographer. He wrote no account of the 
earthly life of Jesus. Aside from the death and 
resurrection of Jesus, which were central to his 
thinking, he makes no mention of any of the 
facts connected with the life of Jesus. How- 
ever, Luke was the friend and companion of 
Paul. His gospel must have been written dur- 
ing the life-time of the apostle, because it was 
written before the book of Acts, and if Saint 


95 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


Paul was not living when the latter came from 
the hands of Luke some mention doubtless 
would have been made of His death. If Paul 
had not read the gospel of Luke he must have 
been acquainted with the essential facts con- 
tained in it, including the story of the birth 
of Jesus which Luke described so fully and so 
explicitly. It is incredible that that story 
should have been incorporated into Luke’s gos- 
pel, if Saint Paul, with whom he had been so 
intimately asosciated, should have challenged or 
discredited the Virgin birth of Jesus. 


The alleged silences of Mark, J ohn, and Saint 
Paul are not at all conclusive. To say that 
they afford sufficient ground for rejecting the 
Virgin birth of Jesus strains one’s credulity be- 
yond the breaking point. The story of the 
divine conception of the Redeemer of men, con- 
tained in the earliest manuscripts and versions 
of the New Testament, is an integral part of 
the gospel record and cannot be rejected with- 
out rejecting the whole testimony of the gos- 
pels, Regardless of its bearing upon faith, the 
question of the Virgin birth is a question of fact, 
and as such it stands or falls with the other 


96 


facts recorded in the New Testament writings. 
There is not a scintilla of evidence in these writ- 
ings for rejecting this fact which corroborates 
and substantiates the evidence adduced by the 
apostles and the claims of Jesus Himself that He 
was “the only begotten of the Father, full of 
grace and truth.” 


97 





THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


99 





CHAPTER V. 
Tue RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 


The resurrection of Jesus is the crowning 
miracle of Christianity. Of all the miracles 
connected with the life of Jesus, this is the best 
authenticated. All of the apostolic witnesses to 
the miracles allude to the resurrection and dwell 
at length upon it. 


Late on the afternoon of the crucifixion, the 
bruised and mangled body of Jesus, having been 
taken down from the cross, was laid away in the 
new-made sepulchre of Joseph of Arimathea 
and a huge stone was rolled before the mouth 
of it. On the morning of the third day, when 
the women went with the purpose of anointing 
and embalming the body, the stone was found 
rolled away and the sepulchre empty. His dis- 
ciples believed and declared that Jesus had 
risen from the dead and had appeared to them 
on numerous occasions in person. Since this was 
an event which happened many centuries ago, 
upon what grounds do we today base our belief 


101 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


in the resurrection of Jesus? Let us introduce 
the witnesses, examine the facts, and weigh the 
evidence. 


The first witness whom we shall put upon the 
stand is the Apostle Paul. He was a highly 
educated man, a pupil of Gamaliel, one of the 
most celebrated Jewish teachers of his time. 
From being. a most bitter opponent of Christi- 
anity he was converted and became a zealous 
apostle of the new faith, founding numerous 
churches in Asia Minor and Europe. 


The earliest and most carefully arranged 
statement of the evidence for the resurrection 
of Jesus is found in the fifteenth chapter of his 
First Epistle to the Corinthians. This is one 
of the oldest documents in the New Testament 
and by competent Christian scholarship is be- 
lieved to have been written before any of the 
four gospels. When Paul wrote this epistle he 
was nearly as close, in point of time, to the 
resurrection of Jesus as we are today to the 
assassination of President McKinley or the 
death of Queen Victoria. In this chapter he 
states: 


102 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


1. That Jesus rose from the dead on the 
third day. 


2. That after his resurrection he appeared 
to Peter. 


3. That he appeared to James. 
4. That he appeared to the twelve. 


5. That on one occasion he appeared to as 
many as five hundred of the brethren, some of 
whom had since died, but the majority of whom 
were still living at the time of his writing and 
could testify to the facts. 


6. That last of all he appeared to Paul “as 
of one born out of due time.” 


7. That the resurrection of Jesus was 
preached by all the apostles, and was not ques- 
tioned among Christians of that time. ‘There 
seemed to be some doubt as to a general resur- 
rection after death, but not to that of Jesus 
Christ. 


There is a curious if not a remarkable omis- 
sion in the chain of evidence which the apostle 
presents, viz: he makes no mention of the ap- 
pearance of Jesus to the women on the morning 


108 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


of the resurrection. There is no reason to sup- 
pose that Paul intended to discredit their ac- 
count, but he was an old bachelor with an old 
bachelor’s prejudices against womanhood in 
general and probably felt that their testimony 
did not add to his argument in favor of the 
resurrection and for that reason omitted it as 
of no importance. 


Aside from this curious omission the Apostle 
Paul presents a remarkable summary of the 
evidence in support of the resurrection of Jesus 
from the dead. So sure was he of the facts 
that he could say, “But if there be no resurrec- 
tion of the dead, then is Christ not risen. And 
if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, 
and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are 
found false witnesses of God; because we have 
testified of God that he raised up Christ; whom 
he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ 
raised ; and if Christ be not raised, your faith is 
vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also 
which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If 
in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of 
all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen 


104 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


from the dead and become the firstfruits of 
them that slept.” 


The next witness whom we shall introduce is 
Saint Luke. He was not an eye-witness, but he 
had access to many who were. As a historian 
he was careful, accurate and painstaking. This 
is brought out by the fact that in his writings 
he frequently mentions persons, places and local 
customs. So far as secular history and the re- 
searches of archeology have shed any light 
upon these matters they show that in not a single 
point has he been found to be in error. In his 
gospel he gives a detailed account of the resur- 
rection of Jesus and speaks of numerous appear- 
ances to His disciples, while in the book of Acts 
this careful and painstaking historian says that 
to the apostles whom he had chosen Jesus 
“showed Himself alive after His passion by 
many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty 
days, and speaking of the things pertaining to 
the kingdom of God.” 


The third witness whom we shall summon is 
Saint Peter, an eye-witness and chiefest among 
the apostles. He wrote no gospel and has given 


105 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


no detailed account of the resurrection, but in 
the book of Acts we have an extended report 
of the sermon which he preached on the day of 
Pentecost, just seven weeks after the resurrec- 


tion of Jesus from the dead. In that sermon 
he said: 


“Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus 
of Nazareth, a man approved of God among 
you by miracles and wonders and signs, which 
God did by him in the midst of you, as ye your- 
selves also know: Him being delivered by the 
determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, 
ye have taken, and by wicked hands have cruci- 
fied and slain: whom God hath raised up, 
having loosed the pains of death: because it 
was not possible that He should be holden of 
it. For David speaketh concerning Him, I fore- 
saw the Lord always before my face, for He is 
on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 
therefore did my heart rejoice and my tongue 
was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in 
hope: because thou with not leave my soul in hell, 
neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see 
corruption. Thou hast made known to me the 
ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy 


106 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


with thy countenance. Men and brethren, Ict 
me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, 
that he is both dead and buried, and his sep- 
ulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore 
being a prophet, and knowing that God had 
sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of 
his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise 
up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this 
before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that 
His soul was not left in hell, neither His flesh 
did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised 
up, whereof we all are witnesses.” . 


To whom were these words spoken? To the 
people in the city of Jerusalem, just outside of 
which Jesus had been crucified and buried. The 
facts were right at hand, and if contradiction 
ever was possible it was then and there. Yet 
Peter boldly affirmed the resurrection of Jesus 
as a fact which could not be disputed. In all 
of the accounts which we have of the subsequent 
preaching of Peter, as well as in his first Epistle, 
this same fact stands out with unusual promi- 
nence. 


Matthew, Mark and John all were eye-wit- 
nesses and in their gospels they give detailed ac- 


107 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


counts of the facts connected with the death and 
resurrection of Jesus, describing the tomb, the 
visit of the women on the first day of the week 
with the purpose of annointing and embalming 
the body of Jesus, the incredulity and disbelief 
of the disciples when first informed that Jesus 
had risen from the dead, the various appear- 
ances of Jesus—how He talked with them, 
walked with them, ate with them—showing them 
His nail-pierced hands and feet, together with 
his wounded side, all of which convinced these 
men that they had seen, not a spirit nor a vision, 
but Jesus Himself, who had triumphed over 
death and the grave. 


In any court of justice two unimpeachable 
witnesses are sufficient to establish a case. Here 
we have the testimony of six competent and 
credible witnesses, four of whom were eye-wit- 
nesses of the facts to which they testify, and 
the other two were men of unusual ability who 
had access to all of the facts, and yet upon 
the basis of these facts they asserted in the 
positive and uncompromising terms that Jesus 
had risen from the dead. 


Not only do we have the direct and unequiv- 


108 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


ocal statements of the apostles themselves wit- 
nessing to the fact of the resurrection, but cer- 
tain things are explicable only upon the basis 
of this fact. How shall we account for Christi- 
anity itself? For nineteen centuries this relig- 
ion has been a vital force in the world’s life and 
history. It has exalted womanhood, it has hon- 
ored childhood and has promoted popular edu- 
cation. It has abolished slavery and has 
fostered free governments upon the earth. It 
has kindled the fires of genius, has inspired the 
poet and the painter, has ennobled the task of 
the statesman and the reformer, and has en- 
riched in a thousand ways the entire life of 
humanity. What has been the fundamental 
doctrine of Christianity? The central and 
fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith has 
been that of a crucified and resurrected Redeem- 
er. This is the foundation stone upon which 
the whole superstructure rests. It was upon 
the basis of a belief in the doctrine that the 
triumphs of the early Church were won. The 
disciples were persecuted. They were scourged 
and imprisoned. They were put to death. Yet 
the belief persisted. If the men of that day 


109 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


had been able to prove that Jesus did not rise 
from the dead, they would have done so and 
Christianity would have passed forever out of 
existence. But Christianity and the church still 
live, triumphant witnesses to the fact of the 
resurrection of Jesus. 


How shall we account for the Christian Sab- 
bath? Christianity originated among the Jews, 
and yet our Sabbath is not the Jewish Sabbath. 
They worshipped on the seventh day of the week, 
while we worship on the first day. How did 
this change occur? It is sometimes said that 
Constantine the Great changed the sabbath 
from the seventh to the first day of the week. 
Constantine, however, did not change the day. 
As the first Christian emperor, he simply gave 
legal sanction to the observance of the first day 
of the week, which had long been established by 
Christian practice and custom. 


From the very outset the Christians observed 
the first day of the week. Of this several in- 
stances are recorded in the New Testament. In 
fact there is not a single instance in the New 
Testament where the Christians met for worship 
on the seventh day of the week after the resur- 


110 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


rection of Jesus from the dead. Instances are 
recorded where the Apostle Paul and others went 
to the Jewish synagogues on the seventh day 
of the week, but they did so because the Jews 
were accustomed to meet on that day, and that, 
therefore, they might have opportunity to 
preach the gospel to the Jews there assembled, 
but in no instance did the Christians meet for 
worship on that day. They invariably met on 
the first day of the week. 


How did this change come about? It is not 
easy to change a day that has been established 
by age-long custom. The explanation for this 
change is found in the fact that Jesus arose 
from the dead on the first day of the week, and 
from that day to this, in commemoration of that 
fact, Christians have met upon the first day of 
the week. Crystallized into a custom that has 
persisted for nineteen centuries, the observance 
of the first day of the week constitutes an ir- 
refragable argument in favor of the resurrection 
of Jesus from the dead. 


Having considered the evidence in favor of 
the resurrection of Jesus, let us consider the 
counter testimony, if such there be, against the 


111 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


resurrection. What facts can be adduced to 
prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead? 
There is no evidence to disprove the resurrec- 
tion, but certain objections have been raised 
against it and sundry attempts have been made 
to explain it away. 


It has been alleged that Jesus did not rise 
from the dead, but that his disciples came by 
night to the sepulchre and removed the body, 
after which they circulated the falsehood that 
he had risen from the dead. This overlooks the 
precautions which were taken to prevent any 
attempts of such a character. After the cruci- 
fixion the chief priests and Pharisees went to 
Pilate, saying, “Sir, we remember that that de- 
ceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three 
days I will rise again. Command therefore that 
the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, 
lest his disciples come by night, and steal him 
away, and say unto the people, He is risen from 
the dead: so the last error shall be worse than 
the first.” Pilate readily granted their request, 
saying, “Ye have a watch: go your way, make it 
as sure as yecan.” So the sepulchre was sealed, 
making it secure, and the watch was set to see 


112 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


that the grave was unmolested. Had they been 
so disposed, what could that little band of feeble 
disciples, who had fled so precipitately from 
the mob in the garden of Gethsemane, hope to 
accomplish against a guard of veteran Roman 
soldiers? Who among their number would ven- 
ture to propose so hazardous an undertaking? 
No person can approach the New Testament 
records of the resurrection with an unbiased 
mind and give a moment’s credence to the idea 
that the disciples could have been guilty of so 
gigantic a fraud and piece of deception. 


It is asserted that Jesus did not die upon the 
cross, but merely swooned or fainted away, after 
which His friends worked over Him and brought 
Him back to life, so that instead of a resurrec- 
tion there was simply a resuscitation. In sup- 
port of this theory we are referred to an account 
given in the life of Josephus of the crucifixion 
of a number of captives, three of whom he recog- 
nized as his acquaintances. At Josephus’ re- 
quest they were taken down from the cross and 
given every medical attention for their recovery, 
notwithstanding which two of the three died. 
There is, however, no parallel between this case 


113 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


and that of Jesus of Nazareth. These three 
men were taken down from the cross while evi- 
dently alive, but in Jesus’ case he was to all 
appearances dead when he was removed from 
the cross. It was customary for the Romans, 
after crucifying malefactors, when they took 
them down from the cross, to strike their limbs 
with a heavy mallet, breaking their limbs and 
making death certain if it had not taken place 
already. But when Jesus and the two thieves, 
who were crucified with Him, were taken down, 
the legs of the latter were broken by the soldiers, 
who seeing that Jesus was dead already “brake 
not his legs.”” Nevertheless, one of the Roman 
soldiers thrust his hasta or spear into Jesus’ 
side, piercing the lungs and pericardium, thus 
making death certain, if it had not already 
taken place. Pontius Pilate, moreover, refused 
permission for the burial of Jesus without a 
positive statement from the centurion that 
death had actually taken place. 


Strauss, who rejects the resurrection, says of 
this theory, “One who crept forth from his grave 
half dead . . could not possibly make upon the 
disciples the impression of the Victor over 


114 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


death, the Prince of life, which lay at the source 
of their later activity. Such a coming to life 
could but have weakened the impression he made 
upon them in life and death... . It could not 
possibly have transformed their sorrow into 
enthusiasm, their reverence into worship.” 


Keim is equally emphatic in his rejection of 
this theory, saying, ‘“Then there is the most 
impossible thing of all: the poor, weak, sick 
Jesus, with difficulty holding Himself erect, in 
hiding, disguised, and finally dying—this Jesus 
an object of faith, or exalted emotion, of the 
triumph of his adherents, a risen conqueror and 
Son of God! Here, in fact, the theory begins 
to grow paltry, absurd, worthy only of rejec- 
tion, since it makes the apostles either miserable 
victims of deceit, or, with Jesus, themselves 
deceivers.” 


Jurists tell us that the simplest explanation 
is the truest. Itis a great deal easier to accept 
the simple, straightforward accounts of the 
death of Jesus as these are given in the four 
gospels than it is to believe the labored attempts 
to explain away the facts of His death. 


115 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


There are those who admit the death of 
Jesus but who deny the reality of His resurrec- 
tion and seek in various ways to explain it away. 
Renan says, “Had this body been taken away, or 
did enthusiasm, always credulous, create after- 
wards the group of narratives by which it is 
sought to establish faith in the resurrection? In 
the absence of opposing documents this can 
never be ascertained. Let us say, however, that 
the strong imagination of Mary Magdalene 
played an important part in this circumstance. 
Divine power of love! Sacred moments in which 
the passion of one possessed gave to the world 
a resuscitated God!” Renan here insinuates 
that Mary Magdalene was in love with Jesus, 
and brooding over his death at the empty tomb, 
her feelings were roused to such a pitch that in 
her disordered fancy she actually seemed to see 
Jesus. Reporting to the disciples that she had 
seen Jesus, they believed her and so the passion 
of an hallucinated woman “gave to the world a 
resuscitated God.” 


Is it credible that a hard-headed man like 
Thomas could be convinced by the “passion of 
an hallucinated woman”? At the first meeting 


116 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


of Jesus with his disciples Thomas was absent. 
When the others reported this meeting and said 
to him, “We have seen the Lord,” Thomas in- 
formed them that he did not intend to be misled 
in this matter. They might be mistaken, but he 
proposed to safeguard himself against the pos- 
sibility of a mistake, saying, “Except I shall see 
in His hands the print of the nails, and put my 
finger into the print of the nails and thrust my 
hand into His side, I will not believe.” When 
Jesus appeared to His disciples a few days later, 
Thomas being present with them, He said to 
him, “Reach hither thy finger, and behold my 
hands; and reach hither thy hand and thrust it 
into my side, and be not faithless but believing.” 
When Thomas beheld these mute but indubitable 
evidences that it was none other than the Lord 
who was present in their midst he exclaimed: 


“My Lord and my God!” 


Was Saul of Tarsus the sort of a man who 
could be carried away by the “passion of an 
hallucinated woman?” The other disciples may 
have been unlearned men, but that was not true 
in his case. He was a man unusually keen of 
intellect. Moreover, he was a contemporary of 


117 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


Jesus, and he had the advantage of looking at 
the matter both from the Jewish and the Chris- 
tian standpoint, yet so convinced was he that 
Jesus had actually risen from the dead that 
upon this fact he was willing to hazard his hopes 
of eternal salvation. 


Strauss asserts that the appearances of Jesus 
were visionary. Visions, however, demand a cer- 
tain amount of expectation. But on the part 
of the disciples such expectation was lacking. 
When, on the first day of the week, the women 
went to the sepulchre with the sweet spices 
which they had brought to anoint the body, 
they did not expect to find an empty tomb; in- 
stead they were concerned about who should 
roll away the stone that they might proceed 
with the work of embalming. When they an- 
nounced to the disciples that they had found the 
tomb empty and had seen a young man sitting 
clothed in a white garment, who had said, “He 
is not here, but is risen,” their story was re- 
ceived with doubt and incredulity, for “their 
words seemed to them as idle tales, and they 
believed them not.” The two on the walk to 
Emmaus confided to the one who had joined 


118 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


them, “We trusted that it had been he which 
should have redeemed Israel.” The death of 
Jesus, however, had utterly dissipated their ex- 
pectations and hope gave way to abject and 
utter despair. Whatever expectations his dis- 
ciples may have had, they did not expect that 
he would rise from the dead. 


If the appearances of Jesus had been to a 
single individual or even to a small group of 
individuals on a single occasion, there might be 
some plausibility to the visionary hypothesis. 
But the appearances of Jesus were too numerous 
and in the presence of too many witnesses to 
admit of such a possibility. The resurrection 
of Jesus is better authenticated than any other 
event in ancient history. It is better attested 
than the death of Socrates or the assassination 
of Julius Cesar. Jesus appeared to his dis- 
ciples not once but eleven times, not to a few 
of the brethren only, but to all, and on one 
occasion to five hundred of the brethren at once. 
It is utterly inconceivable that so many persons 
should have been deceived at one and the same 
time. 


None of the foregoing theories will account 


119 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


for the empty tomb of Jesus. That the tomb 
was empty was admitted both by the friends and 
foes of Jesus. The recognition of that fact has 
been at the basis of practically every Jewish 
attack upon the Christian position from the 
day of the resurrection to the present time. 
Either Jesus arose from the dead as His dis- 
ciples alleged or else his body must have been 
spirited away from the tomb. If the latter 
were the case, the body must have been taken 
either by the friends or foes of Jesus. Did His 
friends remove the body? There was no motive 
for them to do so. Their interest in the claims 
of Jesus ceased with his death. Moreover if 
they had been so disposed, veteran Roman 
soldiers were stationed at the sepulchre to pre- 
vent it. Unwittingly the enemies of Jesus, by 
guarding His sepulchre, had taken the best 
method possible for authenticating His resurrec- 
tion. If then the body of Jesus was spirited 
away from the tomb, it must have been taken 
by his foes. If any one had influence with the 
Roman soldiers who had been stationed to guard 
the sepulchre, surely it was the enemies of Jesus. 


But did they take the body? If they had done 


120 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


so, all that would have been necessary on their 
part, to silence forever the story of the resur- 
rection, would have been to produce the body. 
But they did not produce the body. Instead, 
they weakly said, “While we slept,—think of it, 
a guard of Roman soldiers sleeping on the post 
of duty!—‘“while we slept, His disciples came by 
night and stole him away.” 'The whole fabrica- 
tion savors of the preposterous. However, the 
tomb was empty. If the body was spirited away 
neither by the friends nor the foes of Jesus, the 
logic of facts leads irresistibly to a single con- 
clusion, viz: that He must have risen from the 
dead as He Himself had foretold and as His dis- 
ciples afterwards declared with such positive 
assurance. 


Stronger and more convincing even than the 
empty tomb in proof of the resurrection of 
Jesus was the amazing change in the attitude 
and conduct of the disciples. The death of 
Jesus had left them bewildered, broken in spirit, 
and with their confidence completely shattered. 
They were as sheep without a shepherd. Their 
hope was absolutely at an end. During the 
three miserable days that followed they believed 


121 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


in the continued personal existence of Jesus. 
They believed that he would rise again in the 
general resurrection at the last day. But at the 
end of three days something happened which 
transformed these men from a state of absolute 
despair to one of jubilant faith and triumphant 
courage. A belief in the continued personal 
existence of Jesus is insufficient to account for 
this. There is but one adequate explanation, 
and that is the actual, physical resurrection of 
Jesus from the dead. This is the only hypothe- 
sis upon which we can account for the fact that 
a few weak and cowardly disciples became the 
spiritual conquerors of the world. On the night 
of the betrayal Peter followed afar off and thrice 
denied his Lord, but on the day of Pentecost 
we find him boldly charging the people with 
complicity in the unlawful execution of Jesus 
and triumphantly declaring that he had risen 
from the dead. <A similar change took place 
in the other disciples, who cheerfully faced 
death in the advocacy of the resurrection of 
Jesus. It taxes our credulity beyond the break- 
ing point to suppose that this change in attitude 
could have taken place if the body of Jesus was 


122 


THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS 


still in the tomb, or if the broken wreck of a 
crucified man lingered secretly in their midst, 
or if there was only a spiritual resurrection 
without objective reality, the product of a vivid 
or disordered imagination. Nothing short of 
an actual, physical resurrection will account for 
the peculiar intensity of conviction with which 
the disciples gave witness to the triumph of 
Jesus over death and the grave. 


What significance have the miracles of Jesus 
for the men of our day? Precisely the same 
significance which they had for those who wit- 
nessed them nineteen centuries ago. By the 
miracles which Jesus performed, the men of His 
time were enabled to pass judgment upon the 
claims which He made. The same holds true 
today. The only way by which we can judge 
of the claims and character of Jesus of Nazareth 
is by the statements contained in the writings 
of the New Testament. There we find recorded 
the words and works of Jesus. The two go 
together. His works supplement His words. 
He who could still the winds and the waves, 
could heal the sick, could cleanse the leper, open 
the eyes of the blind and unstop the ears of the 


123 


THE MIRACLES OF JESUS 


deaf, and could even raise the dead, in truth 
could say, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the 
Life: no man cometh to the Father but by 
Me;” “I am the resurrection and the life: he 
that believeth in me though he were dead, yet 
shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth 
in me shall never die.” He who by His own 
almighty power could perform such wonderful 
miracles and could triumph over death and the 
grave can fulfill in us the hope of everlasting 
life. As St. Paul expresses it in his Epistle to 
the Romans—Jesus Christ “who was born of the 
seed of David according to the flesh, was de- 
clared to be the Son of God with power, accord- 
ing to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection 
from the dead.” 'To Paul and the other dis- 
ciples, the resurrection of Jesus was the sign and 
seal, declared with power, of His divine Sonship. 
To those who accept the witness of His miracles, 
there is no doubt that Jesus Christ is indeed the 
Son of God, “declared with power by the resur- 
rection from the dead.” 


124 





Ay ‘ h ae 
Pi oF Bree 1k 
1% Wag ACE 


re 














Date Due 






















































































ts yi ¥ : 
haga %, 


bid rie 





feaqunged Peet ET Eee bree Bp 





BS2419 .B368 
The a ete 


Speer Library 


| | [ Hn 


stent: ant ky 


